Comments
drpvn t1_j16oxyz wrote
This is simultaneously insane, outrageous, and fascinating.
ChrisFromLongIsland t1_j16rguz wrote
Another article said an attorney that was booted was going after the liquor license. As you can restrict the general public without cause apparently. Mess with lawyers they will find ways to attack back.
drpvn t1_j16t3qt wrote
Many years ago I had a super shady contractor walk off the job and demand more money to continue. He threatened me by saying he was married to a relative of Joe Crowley and that the Crowleys ran Queens and would make my life very difficult. I was so pissed off that I surreptitiously recorded him (love that one-party consent rule in NY) and spent the weekend drafting (1) a 50 page complaint that detailed everything he said and (2) a settlement agreement in which I agreed to let him out of the contract in exchange for not having to pay him $30k I owed him. I told him if he didn’t sign the agreement I’d file the complaint on Tuesday. He signed. And I also kept his tools. Asshole.
GothamGumby t1_j16viir wrote
Got to start wearing the Kanye masks to the garden
Turbulent-Big-3949 t1_j16yrqa wrote
Unrelated, but I remember my grandmother (who played for the Radio City Christmas show) describing how Dolan, on one occasion, insisted on conducting the orchestra during one of the performances. Luckily he got talked out of it. JIC anyone needed more proof that this guy is a total idiot
whitepangolin t1_j173akp wrote
Man fuck this dystopian ass shit. This should be a way bigger story. Fuck that dude
SolitaryMarmot t1_j17a3y2 wrote
I feel like messing with lawyers is a terrible idea. They will be in there measuring the height of the door handles and filing ADA suits till the nutty Dolans beg for mercy.
GlasgowRose2022 t1_j17bqzk wrote
Dolan. Bah, humbug.
CactusBoyScout t1_j17e9bf wrote
Going after lawyers seems especially risky.
ctindel t1_j17jlfz wrote
I honestly don't understand why this isn't blowing up nationally as the harbinger of a major social issue brewing.
Rottimer t1_j17mdx6 wrote
They've gotten away with it so far. And the publicity it's getting may be doing what Dolan intended for it to do - which is make lawyers question if they want to take on a case that sues MSG Entertainment.
Justinontheinternet t1_j17wcis wrote
Probably the most hated man in NYC
binghamtonswag t1_j1846tk wrote
Absolutely outrageous. What a turd monkey.
bonyponyride t1_j184eao wrote
Where else is this technology being used to screen large crowds? Airports? Government buildings? The subway system? On streets?
available_username2 t1_j188yhs wrote
Good guy msg is just banning lawyers to get a suit sent up to the Supreme Court to set a precedent that you can do this. Only way this makes sense
ClaymoreMine t1_j18eh8k wrote
He’s already been warned about booting people for petty reasons with NYS scheduling hearings to remove MSGs special tax status
CaptAshley t1_j18eycz wrote
Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Why this is not a bigger story and concern is beyond me.
kswissreject t1_j18f7wy wrote
Prob happy to see Crowley get booted out, even if years later, huh? Glad you were able to fuck that guy tho.
snoberto77 t1_j18g07v wrote
I genuinely hope this happens because real fans of the teams have been dreaming of him selling the teams for a long, long time now
spicytoastaficionado t1_j18getf wrote
If this was a narrow ban limited to the actual lawyers involved in active litigation against Dolan's companies, I'd still think it is dumb but at least I'd understand the logic of not wanting someone suing you around your businesses.
But a blanket ban of entire firms is so petty. Where does it end?
You often hear a lot of concern from the west about so-called "social credit scores" in China, but what is happening here, at an increasingly rapid pace, is private institutions implementing social credit scores to block people out of participating in society.
When it comes to the end result, IMO it is just as bad as the government doing it.
spicytoastaficionado t1_j18gqf1 wrote
[deleted] t1_j18i9e2 wrote
[deleted]
Ok-Strain-9847 t1_j18iahg wrote
Dolan is doing his damnest to be the most Hated person in NYC.
AraeZZ t1_j18is5q wrote
worse imo bc the govt is at least somewhat somehow a little tiny bit accountable to the people
private corpos accountable to the board of directors and the goddamn bottom line, fuck everyone else
spicytoastaficionado t1_j18jdyq wrote
>Isn’t it common sense that, as a lawyer, you don’t patronize businesses that you’re firm is litigating against though?
But if you work for a larger firm and aren't even practicing in the state the litigation is taking place in (as was the case with the Radio City mom), it probably isn't something which crosses your mind as you may not even know all the clients and cases your firm is involved in.
That said, MSG claims they sent out letters to the firms informing them of the blanket ban, so I do think at that point, even if they disagree with the policy, the onus is on the firms themselves to notify their employees that they are all banned from MSG properties.
​
>It seems like the lawyers should know better and are stealing the spotlight from the actual story about facial recognition being way more prevalent than most folks realize.
To be fair, the only reason this is a story is because attorneys are banned from MSG properties.
If the Rangers fan who sucker-punched that guy @ MSG complained about facial recognition tech. flagging/banning him from entry, nobody (outside of NYPost) would care.
[deleted] t1_j18kkiq wrote
nationalmoz t1_j18l016 wrote
People keep saying this but I don't see it. He's worth $2bn. He can afford a few frivolous legal challenges.
nationalmoz t1_j18l4uw wrote
I don't like the guy. But it's such an evil genius move.
Can imagine there's a fair bit of internal pressure in these companies to drop these cases. You don't want to be a partner who's gotta woo potential clients and be iced out of the most significant arena in town.
[deleted] t1_j18l4wy wrote
[deleted]
nationalmoz t1_j18ld0f wrote
>But a blanket ban of entire firms is so petty. Where does it end?
Surely this is the point. You ice out dozens of powerful lawyers from the most iconic venue in town.
Even if it doesn't make this firm drop their litigation, it's something other legal firms will see and think twice about taking him on.
Evil genius move, tbh. If I'm a partner at a midtown firm, I'm not risking it if it means I lose my Knicks season ticket, can't take my kids to see Harry Styles, etc.
Throwawayhelp111521 t1_j18m5kd wrote
The lawyer is a woman.
DoNotWeepAtMyGrave t1_j18n179 wrote
Lol what ethics breach and trespassing if they bought tickets to a venue open to the general public?
[deleted] t1_j18oq3u wrote
SinisterMephisto t1_j18pcbm wrote
As the owner of the Rangers I don't mind him. He kinda forgets they exist most of the time and mostly leaves hockey decisions to hockey people. Perfect owner for them honestly. Could have ended up with a Bill Wirtz, Harold Ballard or a Eugene Melnyk.
I do feel bad for Knicks fans though.
dancetothiscomment t1_j18pk8x wrote
Can’t you just bring a picture of said lawyers and fuck with their facial recognition tech?
snoberto77 t1_j18pmzn wrote
True he knows if he touches the hockey team people would riot lol. I think he just knows it’s hands off from what I understand his old man made sure of that.
bsanchey t1_j18pnvo wrote
We as a society need to recon with this tech and balance it with our civil rights. Maybe this doesn’t cross that line but there are many cases that do. But then again so many people are willing to lose right so long as they don’t have to see homeless people so idk 🤷♂️
marishtar t1_j18pp5o wrote
Do you have to do that before going to a basketball game? Like yeah, there are checks for stocks and certain business transactions, due to conflict of interest being a thing. No one is ever going to use those every time they take out their credit card.
[deleted] t1_j18pt2g wrote
[deleted]
robmak3 t1_j18r8r3 wrote
Yeah at the airport if you're flying internationally CBP takes pictures at the gate. Deletes after 15 hrs iirc for US Citizens.
TetraCubane t1_j18rfnn wrote
Wear masks people. Facial recognition doesn't work if they can't see your face.
binghamtonswag t1_j18s1nn wrote
>Isn’t it common sense that, as a lawyer, you don’t patronize businesses that you’re firm is litigating against though?
No this is absurd. MSG is a far reaching corporation across New York with lots of exposure. This is going to result in lot of legitimate lawsuits. Any owner who wasn't the petulant slob that Dolan has shown himself to be would take these lawsuits as nbd cost of doing business. It's just that there's a jaded former drunk running the Knicks with the emotional maturity of a child.
RE5TE t1_j18t5gx wrote
> I'm not risking it if it means I lose my Knicks season ticket, can't take my kids to see Harry Styles, etc.
Barclays center exists too. The Nets are better anyway.
[deleted] t1_j18ud2t wrote
[deleted]
RE5TE t1_j18ukyu wrote
>Also, in court, it undermines your case for your own client.
First of all, no it doesn't. Lawyers don't testify in court cases, so their opinions mean nothing from a legal perspective. Secondly, that means MSG would want them to attend so they could film it. Not keep them out. Are you saying MSG has their opponents best interests at heart?
> They broke it. Maybe unknowingly, but that’s on them.
They did it unknowingly because these are the first times it's happened. This is not common, and possibly illegal. In the complaint about Radio City, the liquor license requires them to be open to anyone who isn't a security threat. Representing an opponent in court isn't a security threat.
Don't make the top law firms mad at you. Supposedly Mark Twain said:
“Never argue with anyone who buys the ink by the barrel.”
bradbikes t1_j18v7up wrote
Everywhere. And it has some real problems, too - like racial bias.
bradbikes t1_j18w5j5 wrote
So you're saying if my firm sued Microsoft it would be a breach of ethics to play a video game on a windows operating system, let alone type my complaint on Microsoft Word - god forbid.
sanspoint_ t1_j18xq6e wrote
Yup. People tend not to believe it, but a lot of facial recognition algorithms are trained on biased data sets, mostly the faces of the young white men who do most of the development of those algorithms. Because of this, they'll often match people of color with the wrong face in the database. People of color have been hauled in by the police under suspicion of having committed a crime because a facial recognition algorithm decided they look too much like a wanted criminal who also happens to be a PoC. It's fucked up.
[deleted] t1_j18ypkq wrote
[deleted]
binghamtonswag t1_j18zv1p wrote
I was an attorney but that’s barely relevant. You’re second question is even less relevant. Good job brining nothing of value back to the conversation.
ctindel t1_j190854 wrote
Well I mean people Moscow Mitch was banned from restaurants. It was a new article but it’s not like there was tons of consternation and pearl clutching. Plus he’s famous and visible they weren’t using mass surveillance techniques and AI to block normal people from doing a girlscout troupe activity.
Why aren’t democrats up in arms about this shit? Where is Bernie and AOCs bill to prohibit companies from using facial recognition in personally discriminatory ways?
[deleted] t1_j190sh2 wrote
[removed]
binghamtonswag t1_j1917as wrote
>Gets called out for stupid question they don't like the answer to. Whines about it.
Hahahaha, thanks for this exchange, I needed a full belly laugh.
[deleted] t1_j192ww9 wrote
[deleted]
Susan-B-Cat-Anthony t1_j19490k wrote
I was wondering if this lady had worn a mask whether she could have slipped past the sensors, I guess it needs your entire face and not just your eyes and cheeks to work.
Hammrsigpi t1_j195uhr wrote
I think the attorneys should see if they have cable tv packages that include money paid to MSG and fight to have it taken off.
If Dolan won't let them in, he shouldn't get their money.
[deleted] t1_j1965jw wrote
[deleted]
binghamtonswag t1_j196fth wrote
Keep reaching and projecting 😂😂 this just keeps getting better. Claims with no rational 😂😂 While your OP is still here for everyone to see 😂😂 I can’t.
jpar70 t1_j196kct wrote
Lol getting heckled at a restaurant for being a giant turd isn’t being “banned.”
nationalmoz t1_j196t58 wrote
Yeah I'm a Nets fan. Just think that big part of law firm stuff/being a partner is schmoozing clients. And I can imagine there are some quite annoying downstream effects of a ban.
kaliwrath t1_j197mzq wrote
Lawyers would LOVE for this to happen!
[deleted] t1_j198438 wrote
[deleted]
binghamtonswag t1_j199h08 wrote
They got so mad they read through my account and found I like Pokémon 😂😂 Then they thought it was some sort of dunk to point out I like the most popular media franchise of all time. I can’t imagine the sort of insecurities that led to that decision but here we are. What you believe about my knowledge of the rules of professional conduct or really anything is quite frankly not very relevant because you’ve shown yourself in this conversation to be one of the dumbest people on the internet and that’s saying something.
RE5TE t1_j19ane3 wrote
Well yeah, I think the ban will not stand up to legal scrutiny. I'm just making a joke because the only cool thing about MSG is the Manhattan address. Barclays is newer and better.
bradbikes t1_j19apxj wrote
Yep. You have to be extremely careful in your curation of the training sets for ai algorithms and companies often aren't because it costs more. And there's very little transparency about it.
Example one company basically just uploaded pictures labeled from the Internet to a predictive ai to help find criminals. The problem being guess which group of people is massively overrepresented with online pictures labeled 'criminal'.
cC2Panda t1_j19cb5v wrote
James Dolan has enough money to force people to sit through his shitty music as an opener for bands like the Eagles and the Rolling Stones. He'll buy as many lawyers as he needs to, to fuck over anyone that tries.
braininjury5000 t1_j19hj5g wrote
I'd guess that because he wasn't in the musicians' union, he was respectfully denied that chance to conduct.
nationalmoz t1_j19hmd0 wrote
> I think the ban will not stand up to legal scrutiny.
I'm sure it will? It's a private business. Can admit who it likes.
[deleted] t1_j19jwvj wrote
Hi, lawyer here - if I were subjected to this treatment because of the firm I worked at, and I weren’t even affiliated with the case, I’d absolutely file a complaint.
And indeed, many attorneys in New York State already have
RE5TE t1_j19lpg2 wrote
> It's a private business. Can admit who it likes.
That's almost the opposite of what being "open to the public" means. I'm starting to think you haven't ever applied for a liquor license in NY.
nationalmoz t1_j19mudz wrote
100% legal. Don't sweat it.
asian_identifier t1_j19nce7 wrote
well they can't because they're not allowed in
[deleted] t1_j19pabg wrote
[deleted]
sanspoint_ t1_j19s03a wrote
> guess which group of people is massively overrepresented with online pictures labeled 'criminal'.
I'm gonna take a wild guess and say... black men?
binghamtonswag t1_j19xfae wrote
Aw you see yourself as a victim instead of ignorant. Adorable.
SwellandDecay t1_j1a26ii wrote
P0stNutClarity t1_j1a2kzt wrote
The stark difference in comments here than on the article itself is so interesting to me.
Therealmohb t1_j1a66zj wrote
Yes this should be national headlines. Fuck that guy!
Therealmohb t1_j1a68tx wrote
Yes this should be national headlines. Fuck that guy! And that technology!!!!!
NetQuarterLatte t1_j1a6ro3 wrote
What if MSG went the other way: instead of banning the lawyers, they started handing free ticket to the lawyers of the firm and their families?
"Oh hey, you work for that firm. Here, we will refund your ticket automatically!"
Therealmohb t1_j1a6t68 wrote
He just LOOKS like a douchebag.
All of us redditors will probably be banned from MSG next for talking trash about him.
bradbikes t1_j1aci5p wrote
Bingo. There were others that had like 100% accuracy with white people but couldn't differentiate between black people causing multiple false arrests.
And all of this is assuming a perfect facial recognition system would even be considered a good idea in a free society, something a lot of people would dispute I think.
TheNormalAlternative t1_j1aeces wrote
He's mad that Mayor Adams took his spot
whateverisok t1_j1aefpr wrote
Not just lawyers, but entire law firms which then effects all of their attorneys.
Sure, State Attorney and all can do something, but that could take months/years and barely result in that much compensation for missing events/experiences, especially the best ones with your kids during the Christmas season
TheNormalAlternative t1_j1aeloj wrote
>it's something other legal firms will see and think twice about taking him on
>
>
>
>If I'm a partner at a midtown firm, I'm not risking it if it means I lose my Knicks season ticket, can't take my kids to see Harry Styles, etc.
Law Firms make business decisions (e.g., which cases to take on and who to sue) based on the lawfirm's commercial interests and the needs of the clients, not the personal interests of the attorneys.
100% doubt any lawyer, except maybe a sole practitioner, would alter or modify their practice simply out of fear of being iced out of MSG.
whateverisok t1_j1af9hu wrote
Hahaha from the complaint: "The odds of an individual plaintiff discussing the subject of the litigation with that MSG employee are astronomical. There are better odds of being struck by lightning or the Knicks winning the NBA championship this year."
nationalmoz t1_j1ah3ve wrote
>Law Firms make business decisions (e.g., which cases to take on and who to sue) based on the lawfirm's commercial interests and the needs of the clients, not the personal interests of the attorneys.
Yes, and among those commercial interests is wooing potential clients. MSG is a big one because it's a premier venue.
TheNormalAlternative t1_j1an700 wrote
Flip side: as a big company with deep pockets, they are a big potential adversary for infinite other clients. There are plenty of other big fish in the sea who aren't retributive.
And the reality is that 98% of law firms would never have a chance at taking on Dolan/MSG as a client
spyro86 t1_j1i7u0q wrote
Facial recognition needs to be outlawed
soufatlantasanta t1_j1izan9 wrote
Has he heard of the Streisand effect?
Dolan is such a distasteful brat.
AutoModerator t1_j16okid wrote
Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/nyc, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a >responsibility to be skeptical, check sources and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find >evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.